Solar Projects in North Africa + Undersea Cables = Green Energy for Europe? (msn.com) 121
"The abundant sun of northern Africa may soon power Europe's homes and businesses," reports the Washington Post, "as European leaders consider connecting massive North African solar projects to undersea power cables to free their continent from Russian energy."
The projects would take advantage of the climate quirk that one side of the Mediterranean is far drearier and cloudier than the other, although Europe and North Africa are geographically close. Abundant desert land also makes North African megaprojects far easier than in Europe, where open spaces tend to be agricultural or mountainous. The sudden need for alternative energy following Russia's invasion of Ukraine means that North African solar projects intended to send electricity to Europe are under active discussion, officials and experts say, as European leaders see a straightforward way to secure large amounts of green power. Past proposals have suggested that North African energy projects could meet as much as 15 percent of Europe's electricity demand.
The interest is especially high in Morocco, where undersea electrical cables already cross the 10-mile span to Spain at the Strait of Gibraltar. Moroccan leaders — who never had any fossil fuels to export — see a chance to promote their country as a renewable energy giant. Europe, meanwhile, wants to hit its ambitious climate goals and address its need for non-Russian energy at the same time. The result is a confluence of interests that could lead to a sudden leap forward for Europe's renewable energy uptake.
More broadly, it is a test for the concept of shipping green energy from sunny parts of the world to regions where the sun doesn't shine as brightly.... Europe alone doesn't have "the potential for the scale to create the dimensions of the renewable energy that we need," said European Commission Vice President Frans Timmermans, speaking alongside Moroccan Foreign Minister Nasser Bourita.
The article cites estimates from the International Renewable Energy Agency that North Africa's "installable capacity" is 2,792 gigawatts of solar power and 223 gigawatts of wind power. Laura El-Katiri, a fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations who specializes in North African renewable energy, writes that could generate more than two and a half times Europe's 2021 electricity output.
The interest is especially high in Morocco, where undersea electrical cables already cross the 10-mile span to Spain at the Strait of Gibraltar. Moroccan leaders — who never had any fossil fuels to export — see a chance to promote their country as a renewable energy giant. Europe, meanwhile, wants to hit its ambitious climate goals and address its need for non-Russian energy at the same time. The result is a confluence of interests that could lead to a sudden leap forward for Europe's renewable energy uptake.
More broadly, it is a test for the concept of shipping green energy from sunny parts of the world to regions where the sun doesn't shine as brightly.... Europe alone doesn't have "the potential for the scale to create the dimensions of the renewable energy that we need," said European Commission Vice President Frans Timmermans, speaking alongside Moroccan Foreign Minister Nasser Bourita.
The article cites estimates from the International Renewable Energy Agency that North Africa's "installable capacity" is 2,792 gigawatts of solar power and 223 gigawatts of wind power. Laura El-Katiri, a fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations who specializes in North African renewable energy, writes that could generate more than two and a half times Europe's 2021 electricity output.
HVDC (Score:5, Interesting)
At first glance I thought, "but transmission losses!" and then I remembered electrical transmission is already done using HVDC between the gaps in Europe [wikipedia.org]. I'm not surprised by this proposal because the population density is MUCH lower in northern Africa compared to Europe. [mapstor.com] There are also less regulatory hurdles and let's face it, EU leaders still don't care what ecological disasters unfold in Africa.
Let's hope this doesn't end up the same way that oil drilling projects have in Africa, with ungodly amounts and unmitigated pollution.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:HVDC (Score:4, Interesting)
Libya is a political mess, Tunisia rather small and Egypt doesn't have a stable government, KSA is typically interested into anything that makes money but they still have plenty of oil.
I've met Algerian engineers that studied for solar development but due to their governments policies and the need to feed their family they had to join the oil industry.
The development that is currently being financed by Germany moved from originally Algeria to Morocco where it is successful.
The idea of energy from the vast belt of desert stretching for over 5000 kms in Africa and another 1000 kms in Saudi Arabia is decades old but AFAIK the only development is the Moroccan one.
Re: (Score:2)
At least the mid east oil barrons see the future and are investing heavily into renewables so their cash spigot doesn't run dry
Re: (Score:2)
Spain and Morocco are building a cable to transfer power. I expect Algeria will join in once it becomes clear that solar is the way forward. The Middle Eastern states have been looking to a post-oil future for decades now, developing their tourism and other industries.
Re: (Score:2)
This would be good for the ecology of North Africa. Shade, reduced erosion, investment for irrigation and tree planting.
Re:HVDC (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
I can’t wait for cost effective superconducting cables
Seems like you may be waiting for a few decades for the discovery of a new superconductor.
Until then, it will be graphene based wires doing the conducting since graphene production became cheap via plasma-based graphite exfoliation. [sci-hub.se]
Re: (Score:2)
Seems like you may be waiting for a few decades for the discovery of a new superconductor.
Only a few decades? It’s something that could change the world on a level that cheap fusion is reportedly going to.
Until then, it will be graphene based wires doing the conducting since graphene production became cheap
Who is to say that the superconducting material we are all waiting on won’t be based in part on graphene? Or perhaps at the very least, the physics of understanding graphene under 2K will help us get there quicker.
Re: (Score:2)
Only a few decades? It’s something that could change the world on a level that cheap fusion is reportedly going to.
You're missing the point: the time factor makes it irrelevant to any impact it could have in addressing climate change. It will have the same impact on climate change as performing a heart transplant on a patient who has already died.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I didn't realize this was a debate so i looked back and your original claim:
HVDC is great, but I can’t wait for cost effective superconducting cables. It really would open up a world wide market for renewables as the sun is always shining somewhere and the wind blowing and that could turn the worlds grids into an open market of trade.
I honestly wasn't trying to move the goal posts but the whole point of the article and renewables is addressing climate change. Climate change aside, by the time the new superconductor it's available it seems likely that we will likely have either grid-scale batteries everywhere or fusion reactors. I find it extremely unlikely that non-ally nations will interconnect as you suggest because it would constitute a major national securit
Re: (Score:2)
I honestly wasn't trying to move the goal posts but the whole point of the article and renewables is addressing climate change.
Which is why I liked the HVDC development, it’s here now, fairly mature, and will make an improvement even if it’s not a solution to everything. While the hype around the difficulties aren’t really overstated, most people don’t understand what loss free long distance transmission would mean.
Climate change aside, by the time the new superconductor it's available it seems likely that we will likely have either grid-scale batteries everywhere or fusion reactors.
You had me until fusion. Cost effective fusion is likely as hard if not harder to actually implement and by your logic should not be relevant or focused on because by then climate change will
Re: (Score:2)
I hope you didn’t fall for the recent fusion hype,
By my estimate, we'll get a working fusion reactor in 2070 at earliest.
Further, regions like the UK won’t be helped as much by battery storage alone as much of the solar energy is blocked by clouds and not everywhere is fit for wind turbines
There aren't a lot of places that don't get much wind and don't get much sunlight but I understand the issue. Even current HVDC tech is quite sufficient for the job.
But people do things that are bad for them every day because rationality never figured in
Precisely why a global grid is an unworkable solution.
Re: (Score:2)
By my estimate, we'll get a working fusion reactor in 2070 at earliest.
Seems reasonable, I personally see the advances in superconducting ribbon have pushed it to more like 40 years but 46 and change wouldn’t be surprising.
There aren't a lot of places that don't get much wind and don't get much sunlight but I understand the issue.Even current HVDC tech is quite sufficient for the job.
Even current high voltage is sufficient for the job as we see it today. We are talking 96% efficient over 500km vs 98% for HVDC vs ~100% for superconducting cable.
Precisely why a global grid is an unworkable solution.
And herein lies the misunderstanding. Go back and read where I said we would have one communist world grid. I said it would open up trade between existing grids which it will. Austra
Re: (Score:2)
We are talking 96% efficient over 500km vs 98% for HVDC vs ~100% for superconducting cable.
If you already laid the cable and are powering it then the ROI is going to be quite low unless you have applications that are simply waiting for more power to become available.
Go back and read where I said we would have one communist world grid.
I can't find where you wrote that but that's literally never going to happen. That's like Star Trek utopian stuff which sounds nice and is completely infeasible because humans are involved. Even if you could somehow split the cables in the middle of the ocean floor, Another crazy nation could pump an obscene amount of voltage into the
Re: (Score:2)
By my estimate, we'll get a working fusion reactor in 2070 at earliest.
Seems reasonable, I personally think the advances in superconducting ribbon have pushed it to more like 40 years but 47 wouldn’t be surprising.
There aren't a lot of places that don't get much wind and don't get much sunlight but I understand the issue. Even current HVDC tech is quite sufficient for the job. Even current high voltage is sufficient for the job as we see it today. We are talking 96% efficient over 500km vs 98% for HVDC vs ~100% for superconducting cable.
Precisely why a global grid is an unworkable solution.
And herein lies the misunderstanding. Go back and read where I said we would have one communist world grid. I said it would open up trade between existing grids which it will. Australia could sell excess solar to Mexico for example, deserts far from civilization but with wind and solar resources would be more cost effective. It’s going to be a big thing eventually, provided we can achieve it, but so will technology like cost effective solar.
Re: (Score:2)
Bullshit. You do not understand how superdonduction works. In actual fact, the tech is unsuitable for long-haul electricity transportation. It starts with not working at room temperature. It continues with (comparably) really low current limits and above them the superconducting collapses. And then you have the expensive exotic materials needed. Any of these problems is prohibitive.
At the same time, HVDC is mature and efficient enough that superconduction would not improve it by much. Typical loss figures a
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You are fantasizing. Superconduction does not have zero loss when used in practice. For example, it still needs to be DC or it will have a lot of non-ohmic losses. My logic is perfectly fine, I just do not make invalid assumptions about superconduction.
Re: (Score:2)
My logic is perfectly fine, I just do not make invalid assumptions about superconduction.
So a 2% gain is incredibly useful when it goes from 96-98% but the last 2% from 98-100% is not useful or important. Sounds like rock solid logic, of course.
For example, it still needs to be DC or it will have a lot of non-ohmic losses
Yes because after inventing room temperature superconductors at a low cost they will load them in a lossy fashion in an attempt to undo those gains. Also rock solid logic.
Re: (Score:2)
The loss is distance-based - you're debating the losses over 1,000 KM while discussing a 10,000 KM transmission line - HVDC losses are 3.5% per 1,000 KM, over 10,000 KM the losses become 35% - using HVAC transmission lines the losses would be aprox double that (6.7% per 1,000 KM, or 67% over 10,000 KM).
The issue is that there is no deploy-able energy transmission method with 0% loss, and lets not pretend there is, OK?
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks for the links too!
Re: (Score:2)
Yep, putting _solar_ plants into a figging _dessert_ is going to cause "ecological disasters".
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The transmission lines will pass through countless African nations and territories without any political challenges, corruption, or vandalism by war lords looking to collect protection money from rich Europeans...
Africa is one of the most stable areas around, what could go wrong?
Re: (Score:2)
Oil drilling in Africa produces ungodly amounts of unmitigated pollution.
Solar panels don't leak any pollution.
Makes sense (Score:1)
Put solar panels where the sun shines the most. The shade cast by the panels could also help along the lines of the fog/mist water catching nets. No idea if it would.
Just my 3 ha'pence.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
yeah makes total sense, create energy security by putting energy generation in some of the most unstable parts of the world.
Well, given that so much of Europe's oil and gas already comes from unstable regions in the middle east and Russia, adding some North African solar to the mix would only improve things, by adding redundancy to their energy mix.
Northern Africa (Score:5, Interesting)
Northern Africa isn't full of the most stable, cooperative nations in the world. I don't expect that putting in mega-projects that could be used to hold Europe to ransom would do more than create potential for entrenched warlords who control the power and end up with Western support to protect the flow of electrons.
Seriously - you're going to tie the EU's electric heat in winter to Algeria and Libya? Awesome plan. No way that could result in human suffering.
Re: (Score:2)
Umm, did you miss the specific mention of Morocco and neither Libya nor Algeria?
Re:Northern Africa (Score:4, Informative)
Yeah, because Morocco is such a stable area.
Hint: West Sahara. You might never have heard of Polisario [wikipedia.org], but blowing up a few solar plants should do the trick.
Re: (Score:2)
The difference is this, in the US, normal people can get shot up. Nobody gives a fuck about that. In Northern Africa, corporate property might get damaged. And this is what investors care about.
Re: (Score:2)
You do know that there is a VAST difference between Africa south and north of the Sahara, yes?
Re: (Score:2)
Polisario will likely not resort to terrorist tactics, they pretty much said they will fight for their independence but they will not target civilians. The question is, though, whether this will hold true for every group that wants independence for West Sahara. They have shown that they are very willing to use military force (so far, against military and "official" targets only) in their struggle, and while I hope that this will continue, I cannot rule out that some groups are not as restrained.
Also, you kn
Re:Northern Africa (Score:5, Insightful)
Northern Africa isn't full of the most stable, cooperative nations in the world.
Wait until you find out where most of the petroleum is.
Re: (Score:2)
Northern Africa isn't full of the most stable, cooperative nations in the world.
Wait until you find out where most of the petroleum is.
Russia, Middle-east, Canada, Venezuela, ... Sure Libya has some high proven reserves, but Algeria, and Egypt are quite unremarkable compared to most countries in the world. The thing about oil, we have a shit-ton of it.
The industry itself is currently pondering the previously unthinkable for all oil and gas projects: An oil well life-time based on reduced demand rather than exhausted supply. Few oil major projects are currently pondering timelines based on emptying out the wells that are being built.
Re: (Score:2)
Reminder, we have some oil under the US, especially in Alaska. That we choose not to drill for it doesn't mean it isn't there.
Re: (Score:3)
Imagine being dependent on the middle East for your energy.
Re: (Score:3)
As others have pointed out, there is a huge difference between oil and electricity.
With oil, it's more fungible. It's easier to get it from someone else and the market really doesn't care as long as total supply isn't affected (barring something extreme like the sanctions against Russia which have them getting half the market value on their oil exports).
Power to the EU from northern Africa would come from a tiny number of sources through a tiny number of cables, and if they're cut off the EU can't just ord
Re: (Score:2)
They keep fossil plants in reserve in case transmissions lines go down, or a nuclear reactor has to SCRAM and take gigawatts off the grid with it.
There will be a lot more battery storage too, so the reserve plants don't need to be kept spinning. The batteries can cover for the 5-10 minutes it takes them to come online.
Nobody is saying we just rely on African solar, it will simply be one part of a larger system, that also helps African nations attract inward investment and avoid building fossil fuel generato
Re: (Score:2)
Imagine being dependent on Russia for your energy.
FTFY
With the stroke of a pen, the US could once again become energy-independent (our exports exceed our imports), that we rely on the middle east is a political decision by current leaders, subject to change as administrations change.
Re: (Score:2)
If that's your standard...Well, they can give up now.
If they wanted to put it in mainland Europe your choices are...Spain, Italy...Greece?
Basically it seems that political stability is directly correlated with latitude.
Re: (Score:2)
Have you seen Russia and bits of Eastern Europe? I don't think it's quite as easy as simple location.
There's no need to give up, but the risks have to be considered. Do you want to see Europe returning to the colonial era to protect energy infrastructure? Because if millions of Europeans are getting really cold in the winter, there will be war over it. If millions of Europeans don't feel electricity is inexpensive enough, they'll look the other way while their governments do horrible things to the ones
Re: (Score:2)
And agriculture there will be failing anyway, with drought and global heating. No kidding, this year's crop will fail, you'll read it in the news in a few months. It's been bone dry in Spain.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't recall reading in the papers last year that crops had failed in Spain, and reservoir levels this year [embalses.net] have been higher than at the corresponding time last year. I'm not saying that you're wrong to project declining water availability, and water availability has been a major political problem in Spain for some time, but I think you're exaggerating the immediate scale of the problem.
That said, the major soft fruit production areas in Andalucía are both among of the areas currently facing greate
Re: (Score:2)
Would any of those European countries happen to be in NATO? Any chance such threats would be considered "actionable"?
Strategically dumber than oil and gas (Score:1, Insightful)
At least oil and gas can be stockpiled in case of instability abroad causing supply disruptions. Electrons from solar can't even be stockpiled during the day for use at night at any scale worth talking about*.
*Fun fact from a few years back is that all the installed utility scale batteries in California had enough capacity to run the state for...under 10 minutes.
Re: (Score:2)
That is the problem with relying on electricity for most power needs. But in this particular case there is the cross-Med extension cord that could be easily severed. But one suspects this road is inevitable -- so maybe working on attitudes...
Re: (Score:2)
That's where hydrogen and renewable methane come in. EU has relatively high targets for electrolyser roll out.
I used to think synthetic fuel was a complete non starter, but achievable cost for CO2 seawater extraction is low and for methane, synthesis and storage can be combined through underground bio-methanation. It's just wildly expensive, not impossibly expensive.
Re:Strategically dumber than oil and gas (Score:4, Informative)
One pipeline shutting down from a ransomware attack is enough to cause panics and price gouging. https://www.msspalert.com/cybe... [msspalert.com]
The sun is always shining somewhere.
Re: Strategically dumber than oil and gas (Score:3, Insightful)
One pipeline shutting down does not affect stockpiles of oil and gas on the receiving end. My gas tank didn't suddenly drain to zero last summer when the pipeline shut down. Nor did the lights go out. Nor did my heating oil tank empty out. Nor did anyone's who lived nearer to the pipeline than I did.
If the extension cord gets cut, my EV battery would run to empty sooner. My heatpump/ac would not operate, and the water pressure would drop after a while too.
Electrifying fixed equipment is not stupid if the el
Re: (Score:3)
Electrifying fixed equipment is not stupid if the electricity is generated reasonably nearby (preferably by nuclear power to appease the global warming nutters) but electrifying anything is suicidal if it entails running an extension cord to some third world shithole that has a revolution every thirty years or less.
On the flip side, if done correctly, this could create jobs for workers in those countries, and provide additional money going into those countries, which can help bring them out of poverty and make them less of a "third-world shithole" and less likely to have a revolution every thirty years.
The biggest problem right now is that countries don't depend on each other enough. In an ideal world, we would have power grids crossing the Atlantic and Pacific oceans as well, ensuring that solar power can work all n
Re: Strategically dumber than oil and gas (Score:2)
Oil and gas was supposed to provide that prosperity. It didn't. The kleptocrat warlords that run these places treated it as one more chess piece in their games of patronage and personal empirebuilding, and they'll do the same with solar.
As a point of fact, we are *too* dependent on governments whose values conflict with our own, and two generations' worth of "engagement" has had the triple effect of
1. Entrenching their power by enabling them to claim credit for any material prosperity that does arise.
2. Lin
Re: (Score:2)
African workers maintaining solar facilities and transmission lines will not provide sufficient economic activity to turn the African economies around, even if every worker ate every meal in a local restaurant, went to and from work in taxi cabs, and chose to live in a hotel, putting every dollar/euro/whatever earned into the local economy.
Re: (Score:2)
One pipeline shutting down does not affect stockpiles of oil and gas on the receiving end. My gas tank didn't suddenly drain to zero last summer when the pipeline shut down. Nor did the lights go out. Nor did my heating oil tank empty out. Nor did anyone's who lived nearer to the pipeline than I did.
Just how much stockpiled gasoline do stations have? One day of panic buying an they're empty. Look at what happened with the beginning of covid and people buying out grocery stores. The supply chain is razor thin and it doesn't take much to disrupt it.
Colonial Pipeline began to slowly restart the nation’s largest fuel pipeline network on Wednesday after a ransomware attack shut the line, triggering fuel shortages and panic buying in the southeastern United States.
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/05/1... [cnbc.com]
https [forbes.com]
Re: (Score:2)
When one mentions "stockpiles" of oil, one isn't discussing the tanks buried under the ground at the local gas station, they are talking about the terminals you see along the highway, or the "Domestic Reserve" nations stockpile in case of emergency (or sagging political polling when gasoline prices go up before the mid-term elections).
Re: (Score:2)
OTOH, here in BC, after the floods the other year closed the pipelines, the railways and the highways, leaving only barging, we had closed gas stations with rationing at the ones with gasoline, barely any natural gas, which didn't matter too much in the summer and lots of electricity as the transmission lines weren't affected by the floods. And some of those transmission lines are from one end of the Province to the other, the long way, so about 3 Texas's and total 180,000 km. There's also the out of Provin
Re: (Score:2)
That's amazing! The entire planet is 25,000 miles in circumference, yet BC is 110,000 miles (180,000 KM) across (the long way)?
You really imagine they run power from Mexico, across the US (southern to northern border) and then to random parts inside BC? If BC is 110,000 miles across, I can only imagine how far it is from Mexico to remote BC (assuming you also go "the long way")!
Re: (Score:2)
Total mileage of the transmission system, and yes, the western interconnect means power from the Peace River gets fed to Mexico (Northern Baja) at times and could work the other way if needed.
Learn to read.
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds like you are defending that 180,000 km claim...
The moon is 384,000 km away, so you realize you're claiming it's almost half the distance to the moon? You sure about that 180,000 km?
Re: (Score:2)
Looks like I added a zero, apologies, source, https://www.bchydro.com/energy... [bchydro.com]
Re: (Score:2)
My gas tank didn't suddenly drain to zero
If the extension cord gets cut, my EV battery would run to empty sooner.
Ahhh I see you drive to the petrol station at the end of every single day to ensure your car always has a full tank of gas in the morning. No? Oh in that case you are very likely to find in a time of crisis your gas guzzler very much *is* likely to run out sooner.
Your point is very much still correct about transport of energy, but it utterly absurd to think it doesn't apply to oil as much as electricity.
Re: (Score:2)
There is a risk of cable breaks. And prices will fluctuate. But have some decentralization in electricity production can be beneficial.
Re: Strategically dumber than oil and gas (Score:2)
Risk cannot be meaningfully amortized when there's a handful of cables to a single source of power the same way it can be when there are dozens upon dozens of tankers sailing from dozens upon dozens of oil terminals.
Re: (Score:2)
The bottleneck is refineries. One refinery 10,000 km away goes offline and we have problems here. Two close and prices shoot up to force people to cut back.
Don't have to take too many refineries out to fuck a continent.
Re: (Score:2)
So why not build more refineries? Because it offends climate activists, so we are forced to keep expanding the capacity of existing refineries.
There are 135 operating refineries in the US - the loss of one wouldn't cause a serious problem, it would impact availability in a limited area until the refinery was brought back on-line.
One refinery 10,000 km away goes offline and we have problems here.
Where do you live that you are 10,000 KM away from a refinery? I'm in Texas, and a refinery 6213 miles away would be in the outskirts of Moscow, Russia or Tokyo, Japan - and a refi
Re: (Score:2)
The oil companies have no interest in building more refineries, they make more money with a shortage. It's also a long term investment.
Yes, I exaggerated the distance, looking, it's about 4000 km's to where refineries seem to go out (often planned for maintenance) too often jacking up the price of gas here. At least that is always the excuse when the price of gas goes up as world prices drop.
excellent! (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
You should think that they got the hint last year... tying your power dependency to a region you can't trust is probably not a good idea.
And one or a small number of undersea cables, too (Score:2)
You should think that they got the hint last year... tying your power dependency to a region you can't trust is probably not a good idea.
And didn't the explosions on the Nord Stream pipeline wise them up about how depending on a small number of undersea lines for your energy opens you up to quick sabotage taking out your energy supply?
Re: (Score:2)
Don't worry, I got it just fine. I just piled on it.
They went from relying on Russia to relying on Africa. I mean, even a kid knows that when you touch the stove, you needn't touch the oven when it shows the same kind of brightly burning fire.
Re: (Score:2)
Singapore is trying for a project to get vast amounts of solar power from Australia, which is somewhat more politically stable than anywhere in Africa. (What could possibly go wrong with a 3,000 km undersea power line, after all?)
There are business and technical problems, but at least not political ones!
Supplying Europe might be a little beyond reach though.
Won't happen (Score:2)
One of the biggest points of discussion about energy in Europe is energy security. The idea that Europe will replace Russia for North Africa is a Washington Post fantasy. The reality is the great part about renewable energy is that several different options are available to nearly all countries.
Re: (Score:1)
EU is reliant on the Mediterranean African nations being a shield for mass migration of undesirables any way, because we're cowardly scum who look the other way while they limit migrant flows with violence. EU security is water under the bridge.
Re: (Score:1)
EU security is water under the bridge.
Not all forms of security are the same. Comparing a migration crisis to having your primary energy cut-off is insanely naive.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
perhaps we ought to turn to nuclear
It's safe and reliable. I know it's because oil & gas companies don't want nuclear power, but people really need to understand the costs of nuclear in the long-term compared to renewables. Those solar panels don't last forever like they want you to believe they do.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, Finland managed to bring one online after 18 years, only 14 years late.
It's the problem with nuclear, way too long to bring it online and I'd assume the price went way up. And then you still can get fucked with droughts and such as France learned last year.
Re: (Score:2)
And then this: "Europe alone doesn't have the potential for the scale to create the dimensions of the renewable energy that we need". That statement is worrying.
It's not worrying. Just incorrect.
No they won't (Score:5, Informative)
The abundant sun of northern Africa may soon power Europe's homes and businesses
No. Because all of this ignores the massive amount of political issues these ideas consistently raise. To put it really bluntly, Africa is not Europe's bitch. The citizens, I know this may come as a shock to everyone, want power produced in these nations to be used to power the nations that produce it. Because Europe fucking sucks at treating the various African nations fairly. Not to mention there's that whole colonization thing that we're not even a full century away from that's still got a bunch of these nations not exactly running to make deals with Europe.
The interest is especially high in Morocco, where undersea electrical cables already cross the 10-mile span to Spain at the Strait of Gibraltar
If you're wondering how those cables got there, it is from the last failed projects that attempted to use concentrated solar in the African desert. Additionally, those cables between Morocco and Gibraltar aren't a full install. The third interconnect is scheduled to come online in 2030. These three cables they have installed are estimated to be able to transport 2.1GW. Wow, such energy. Much power. The three interconnects have come in at about half a billion US dollars so far. To have just 10% of Europe powered, ignoring transport losses, we would need somewhere between 60 to 80 times more interconnects. Remember, just three sank about half a billion. The ROI on these cables are nowhere in a domain of realistic to any European citizen.
And again, all of this assumes we just do nothing but drag cables under the Mediterranean, which is distinctly NOT a thing we can just do. Eastern Europe is better served with land transport through the Middle Eastern countries. But then comes in all the political issues that come with that.
And finally, European citizens are fickle. Case in point, Ouarzazate Solar Power Station. Was going to be the most awesomeness first install in this Africa powering Europe thing. Got to the fourth install, Noor IV, and Europe became less interested in it when Morocco asked for something a little more competitive in energy pricing. This mostly due to Morocco trying to recoup the initial cost they sunk into the concentrated solar. Because when this plant was initially built, that was the "cheap" solar. Now that PV price has dropped like crazy, everyone who initially went into concentrated lost tons of money. Case in point the Crescent Dunes plant in Nevada.
The thing is, this consistent drop in prices for PV is a double edge sword. Everyday it is getting cheaper, but no one wants to buy in if that price keeps falling. The only one's willing to take the L on the price drop are government entities and that's where the bitter taste on the last go round of Africa powers Europe went. Europe indicated "oh we'll pay, oh we'll pay!" Nations began building. PV went cheap. Europe begins saying "well were not paying for old tech!" Just another day, another way Europe fucks African nations over.
This talk of the Sahara powering Europe has to fucking stop. It's just code for European nations looking to fuck over African nations all over again. If power is made in the Sahara, then the power should go to powering African nations. And this is what first world nations forget about "green power". It can't just be the first world nations that get to use clean power and everyone else tells poor nations they can't burn coal or fuel. Solving climate change cannot be a "first world nation, first" approach. You will never get the buy in, or you'll get the initial buy in only to then find that Libya has stopped shipping power to Malta and a "tyrannical leader" is holding poor European electrical power hostage.
Europe, if you want fucking power. MAKE IT YOUR GODDAMN SELVES! How does this continually elude these fuckers?! There's got to be a point where the "Oh no! How could Russia that we're totally depende
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
They don't have the IQ or culture to use it as productively as Europe. They have the resources, Europeans have the brains. In an ideal world everyone profits from Africa trading the resources.
As for profitability that's a question of a good contract ... EU being scum and Africa being corrupt does make it hard to get a good contract written though.
Re:No they won't (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Your post is missing the point in a number of important ways. Let's start with the easiest: "Oh my god, it costs half a billion!!!!" Yes, so what? The number sounds scary without context, but the planned new 700km German HVDC connection is supposed to cost in the low billion range for about the same capacity. That number sounds even more scary until it is set into perspective with the 70 billion EUR annual volume of the electricity market of Germany alone.
Or a couple of F-35 fighters. Society wastes way more more money on way stupider things than long-term infrastructure.
Re:No they won't (Score:4, Insightful)
African nations want to export their power. It's profitable.
They are finally getting a cable to Spain going.
There is plenty of room for solar and wind in Africa, it's not like exporting some will mean none left for Africans. The income will help develop power for Africans.
Re: (Score:2)
they only have to properly pay African nations
Well I mean, there it is.
Re: (Score:2)
and this will create thousands of jobs for people there
Sure it will. Just like it was supposed to in 1998. Just like it was supposed to in 2012. Third times a charm right?
Re: (Score:2)
You know what I think is hilarious is that you literally have cited Wikipedia which indicates Ouarzazate Solar Power Station and it "potential" and it's exactly what I keep mentioning as the gold standard for how Europe has been so "fair" to Morocco. I find it interesting that you have literally brought the exact argument I've already brought as some argument that Europe will make good this time on the solar exporting deal.
You're trying to mint social coin with your made up woes fabricated in utter ignorance of reality.
You know I honestly don't care. Europe is going to do it's "deal making" that it fe
Re: (Score:2)
people were raised out of dark poverty into electrical era in Morocco
One. Who put them there in the first place? Two. Europe sure as shit is not responsible for the majority of that and hardly the solar industry. Morocco's GDP has skyrocketed on the fluctuating market of phosphates. The US and China are the number one and number two producers and Morocco is number three. In the volatility that has become normal for anything US/China, Morocco has become a haven for the world on industrial exports of phosphates. It's price to market has been incredibly stable in spite o
Re: (Score:2)
And the thing is, I'm willing to give Europe benefit of the doubt on WAY more than I should. Because honestly I feel that there's an underlying yearning to do good while it being most times steered in the wrong direction. But holy fucking shit, this particular project, this is it's third restart and the last two times it got dropped is because Europe thought they were too good to be paying premium Euro for power from Africa. Literally France at some point was like, "If it isn't dirt cheap electricity, wh
Well, we have to (Score:2)
Now that Germany had the bright idea to turn off their nuke plants, we gotta get our power from somewhere, and since gas is now evil and coal is anathema...
No go (Score:2)
This plan has been considered also before. It has few major issues.
1. Underwater cables are expensive.1373km cable, transferring 3,000 MW costs about €3.5 billion.
2. Underwater cables would be pretty easy target for any potential enemy.
3. After being blackmailed by Russia, why would Europe want to depend on Africa instead of being independent.
4. Solar plant of 3000 MW would cost about 3 billion. So it would be a lot cheaper to just put the solar panels in Europe.
I don't see any reason why Europe shoul
Why not Spain? (Score:5, Interesting)
The proposed power distribution network would go through Spain.
Spain has 90% of its population living in 30% of the land. The rest is very sparsely populated.
I'd wager that much of that could be used for solar power production, at much lower initial cost, lower distribution cost and at much lower risk.
If cheap labour is what you're after, Spain already does employ many temp labourers from North Africa in its agriculture industry.
Re:Why not Spain? (Score:5, Funny)
Spain could also be used for wind sourced energy. They used to have windmills there before Don Quixote tilted them.
Re: (Score:3)
"I'd wager that much of that could be used for solar power production"
Spain was an early leader in solar, both PV & CSP
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Just do it or shut up about it already! (Score:2)
This idea has been kicking around since the mid-1980s & the DESERTEC foundation that was supposed to finally bring it to fruition is 20 years old.
You don't need to be on another continent. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)